Case Details

Citation(s)
1988 SLG 1646 1988 SLD 1646 (1988) 170 ITR 646
Rajasthan High Court

M.B. SHARMA AND I.S. ISRANI, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Commissioner of Income Tax

v.

Roshanlal Kasliwal

Law:

Section:

Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Reference - Question of fact - A search was conducted on business premises on 19-11-1974 and advance tax was to be deposited by assessee by 14-12 1974 - Assessee's explanation that due to aforesaid search, it failed to furnish advance tax by due date was accepted by Tribunal - Whether Tribunal's finding accepting assessee's explanation was perverse - Held, no - Whether question of law arose out of Tribunal's order - Held, no Facts A search was conducted on the business premises on 19-11-1974 and the advance tax was to be deposited by the assessee by 14-12-1974. Since the assessee failed to furnish the advance tax by due date, the ITO levied penalty under section 273(c). On appeal, the assessee's explanation giving: aforesaid search as the reason for delay, was accepted by the Tribunal and the penalty levied was cancelled. Further, the Tribunal refused to make reference under section 256(1) as in its opinion no question of law arose. On an application under section 256(2), the revenue contended that the finding of the Tribunal accepting the explanation given by the assessee was perverse. Held Indisputably, a search was conducted on the business premises on 19-11-1974 and the advance tax should have been deposited by 14-12-1974. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal accepting the assessee's explanation was not perverse. Further, no question of taw arose out of the order of the Tribunal. R.N. Surolia for the Applicant. G.S. Bafna for the Respondent. ORDER 1. This is an application under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') filed by the revenue, wherein it has been prayed that the following question of law arises in the case and the Tribunal be directed to draw a statement of case: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 11,000 levied under section 273(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" 2. Notice of demand for payment of advance tax of Rs. 31,466 was issued to the assessee. The assessee filed return declaring income of Rs. 2,36,280 and the assessment was completed on an income of Rs. 2,76,600 (after appeal effect). The tax on…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492